Nickels, I told you so

So the latest mint news makes it seem certain that the Jefferson Nickel, as
we knew it 1938-1967 and 1968-2003, is an obsolete design.

I hope others have been prompted to do as I have done and rescue the
remaining examples before they go the way of the Buffalo, the Passenger
Pigeon or the Indian Head Cent. ;-)

Alan
'told you so'

Alan Williams wrote:
So the latest mint news makes it seem certain that the Jefferson Nickel, as
we knew it 1938-1967 and 1968-2003, is an obsolete design.

I hope others have been prompted to do as I have done and rescue the
remaining examples before they go the way of the Buffalo, the Passenger
Pigeon or the Indian Head Cent. ;-)


I don't think they'll vanish so quickly (for example, as quickly as the
old 5s, 10s, 20s, 50s and 100s disappeared.) We'll be seeing the old
Jefferson for at least 5 years (it would be more but the public hoarding
and government meltdown will speed it up.)

I will certainly be hoarding. I've already fished out 71, one of which
is a 1955 piece and another which is a 1964 piece.

"Nick Cassaro" wrote in message
. ..
Alan Williams wrote:
So the latest mint news makes it seem certain that the Jefferson Nickel,
as
we knew it 1938-1967 and 1968-2003, is an obsolete design.

I hope others have been prompted to do as I have done and rescue the
remaining examples before they go the way of the Buffalo, the Passenger
Pigeon or the Indian Head Cent. ;-)


I don't think they'll vanish so quickly (for example, as quickly as the
old 5s, 10s, 20s, 50s and 100s disappeared.) We'll be seeing the old
Jefferson for at least 5 years (it would be more but the public hoarding
and government meltdown will speed it up.)

I will certainly be hoarding. I've already fished out 71, one of which
is a 1955 piece and another which is a 1964 piece.

I predict no government meltdown and minimal hoarding. People will take the
*new* nickels and squirrel them away while continuing to circulate the
1942-D. ;-/

There are enough 1998-P to keep the economy going for a while. ;-)

Alan
'see my theory of obsolete coins and demand'

On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 17:54:43 -0400, "Alan Williams"
wrote:

So the latest mint news makes it seem certain that the Jefferson Nickel, as
we knew it 1938-1967 and 1968-2003, is an obsolete design.

I hope others have been prompted to do as I have done and rescue the
remaining examples before they go the way of the Buffalo, the Passenger
Pigeon or the Indian Head Cent. ;-)

Alan
'told you so'

Alan -

Are you gonna start hoarding every 1938-2003 Jefferson you
come across???

Gary

"Gary Loveless" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 17:54:43 -0400, "Alan Williams"
wrote:

So the latest mint news makes it seem certain that the Jefferson Nickel,
as
we knew it 1938-1967 and 1968-2003, is an obsolete design.

I hope others have been prompted to do as I have done and rescue the
remaining examples before they go the way of the Buffalo, the Passenger
Pigeon or the Indian Head Cent. ;-)

Alan
'told you so'

Alan -

Are you gonna start hoarding every 1938-2003 Jefferson you
come across???

Gary

Gary,

Please don't give him any ideas! ;-D

Mark

"Mark Rossi" wrote in message
...
"Gary Loveless" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 17:54:43 -0400, "Alan Williams"
wrote:

So the latest mint news makes it seem certain that the Jefferson Nickel,
as
we knew it 1938-1967 and 1968-2003, is an obsolete design.

I hope others have been prompted to do as I have done and rescue the
remaining examples before they go the way of the Buffalo, the Passenger
Pigeon or the Indian Head Cent. ;-)

Alan
'told you so'

Alan -

Are you gonna start hoarding every 1938-2003 Jefferson you
come across???

Gary

Gary,

Please don't give him any ideas! ;-D

Mark

Rest easy, gentlemen. ;-) My original adoption rules still hold sway. I
cannot imagine the circumstance that would broaden them to include 1998-P
nickels or 1964's of either mint.

Alan
'those will circulate forever'

Alan Williams wrote:
So the latest mint news makes it seem certain that the Jefferson
Nickel, as we knew it 1938-1967 and 1968-2003, is an obsolete design.

Why the break from 1967 to 1968?

--
Bob

"Bob Flaminio" wrote in message
...
Alan Williams wrote:
So the latest mint news makes it seem certain that the Jefferson
Nickel, as we knew it 1938-1967 and 1968-2003, is an obsolete design.

Why the break from 1967 to 1968?

Mintmark relocation. ;-) Mintmark eliminated 1965-1967, and when
reintroduced was placed on the obverse. A small, minor, but meaningful
change, IMO.

Alan
'especially if you are looking for the mintmark'
Bob

"Alan Williams" wrote in message
. ..

"Bob Flaminio" wrote in message
...
Alan Williams wrote:
So the latest mint news makes it seem certain that the Jefferson
Nickel, as we knew it 1938-1967 and 1968-2003, is an obsolete design.

Why the break from 1967 to 1968?

Mintmark relocation. ;-) Mintmark eliminated 1965-1967, and when
reintroduced was placed on the obverse. A small, minor, but meaningful
change, IMO.

Alan
'especially if you are looking for the mintmark'
Bob


Then shouldn't you say 1938-1941, 1942-1945 (or whenever the slightly Silver
War Nickels were..) .. 1946-1964, and 1968-2003??.. If you're going to
count no Mintmark in those no Mintmark years, then Shirley you should count
the War Nickels with their bigass Mintmarks and Silver content as another
grouping..

The new portrait of Jefferson on the 2005 Nickels is quite nice..
off-center, bleed to the edge, shows some artistry for a change, instead of
the typical small, centered bust of whoever we've had on all our regular
coins for eons, and the Buffalo on the Reverse is a definite winner, IMO..
now why can't the State Quarters look this good??.. Because, for the most
part, the designs are horrible, State outlines, tiny clip-art, designed by
kiddies, chosen by politicians who are mostly lawyers, not educated or
having any sensibilities about Art, design, sculpture.. design by committee
and compromise, trying to please everyone, which is always a bad idea,
because they end up pleasing almost no one..

Harv

"Harv" wrote in message
...

"Alan Williams" wrote in message
. ..

"Bob Flaminio" wrote in message
...
Alan Williams wrote:
So the latest mint news makes it seem certain that the Jefferson
Nickel, as we knew it 1938-1967 and 1968-2003, is an obsolete
design.

Why the break from 1967 to 1968?

Mintmark relocation. ;-) Mintmark eliminated 1965-1967, and when
reintroduced was placed on the obverse. A small, minor, but meaningful
change, IMO.

Alan
'especially if you are looking for the mintmark'
Bob


Then shouldn't you say 1938-1941, 1942-1945 (or whenever the slightly
Silver
War Nickels were..) .. 1946-1964, and 1968-2003??.. If you're going to
count no Mintmark in those no Mintmark years, then Shirley you should
count
the War Nickels with their bigass Mintmarks and Silver content as another
grouping..


Sure, the composition change and everything gets them a type set slot. But
they are scarce in circulation. Not unknown, just scarce...you're right I
should have included them. Also the 1938 design was reactivated for 1946.

The new portrait of Jefferson on the 2005 Nickels is quite nice..
off-center, bleed to the edge, shows some artistry for a change, instead
of
the typical small, centered bust of whoever we've had on all our regular
coins for eons, and the Buffalo on the Reverse is a definite winner, IMO..
now why can't the State Quarters look this good??.. Because, for the most
part, the designs are horrible, State outlines, tiny clip-art, designed by
kiddies, chosen by politicians who are mostly lawyers, not educated or
having any sensibilities about Art, design, sculpture.. design by
committee
and compromise, trying to please everyone, which is always a bad idea,
because they end up pleasing almost no one..

Gotta agree with all that! Points to keep in mind for 2009.

;-)

Alan
'Quarter Hoarding is going to be widespread, but silly'